Deputy Attorney-General and Minister for Justice, Dr Justice Srem-Sai, has questioned the independence and consistency of the leadership of the Ghana Bar Association (GBA) in its response to comments made by Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie and other judicial officers.

Speaking in an interview on Joy FM’s Top Story on Monday, September 14, Dr Srem-Sai said an organisation’s independence should be demonstrated through its actions and conduct rather than simply being assumed or claimed.

“Independence is not a presumed conference,” he said, explaining that for an organisation or institution to be regarded as independent, there must be tangible evidence of that independence.

He said the same principle applied to consistency, arguing that an organisation which describes itself as consistent must demonstrate that quality through its conduct and decisions.

“The point that we made at the conference is that when it comes to independence and when it comes to consistency, the leadership of the Ghana Bar Association leaves much to be desired,” Dr Srem-Sai said.

His comments follow criticism by GBA President Efua Ghartey of remarks made by Chief Justice Paul Baffoe-Bonnie during a visit to the Minerals Income Investment Fund (MIIF) on September 2.

During the visit, the Chief Justice praised MIIF and other public institutions under the current administration, saying some of the developments he had witnessed had left him wondering what Ghana had been doing over the previous eight years.

Mrs Ghartey subsequently described the Chief Justice’s comments as inappropriate while speaking at the Ghana Bar Association Conference 2026/27 in Ada on Monday.

Dr Srem-Sai said, however, that the main issue under discussion was not whether the Chief Justice’s remarks were political, but whether the GBA had applied its own standards consistently in responding to similar comments from judicial officers.

“I don’t think the issue that was up for discussion today was about the Chief Justice’s speech; it’s about the Ghana Bar Association’s response to the speech that the Chief Justice gave,” he said.

According to him, the association has not demonstrated consistency in how it responds to public comments made by Chief Justices.

He argued that if the GBA’s position is that Chief Justices should not make comments perceived as political, that standard should apply whenever a Chief Justice or another judge makes similar remarks.

“If you condemn some and not condemn others, that is where the issue is,” he said.

Dr Srem-Sai therefore maintained that the controversy should not centre solely on whether Justice Baffoe-Bonnie’s remarks were political.

Rather, he said, the focus should be on whether the GBA is applying its principles independently, consistently and without selectivity.